South Started Civil War Over Slavery

[Orange_Juice]

That's just a fact.

Let's have some fun! Wanna look stupid? Try to say slavery wasn't the reason for the war.

 

[BillyBob]

Can we make slavery legal again? At least I'd feel like I was getting something for all the money we keep wasting on blacks between food stamps, free education, free health care....

For all that I should at least have them out in my fields picking cotton.

 

[jillian]

Can we make slavery legal again? At least I'd feel like I was getting something for all the money we keep wasting on blacks between food stamps, free education, free health care....

For all that I should at least have them out in my fields picking cotton.

sayeth the poster boy for white trash...

 

[BillyBob]

sayeth the poster boy for white trash...

That still puts me a half dozen rungs above a ******.

 

[Orange_Juice]

Can we make slavery legal again? At least I'd feel like I was getting something for all the money we keep wasting on blacks between food stamps, free education, free health care....

For all that I should at least have them out in my fields picking cotton.

We shopuld have given them the land after the war that they had worked for two hudred years, then they wouldn't have needed so many social services

 

[random3434]

sayeth the poster boy for white trash...

You just insulted white trash everywhere jillian, this "boy" is the island where you go to dump all your trash because there is too much trash in the landfill.

 

[BillyBob]

We shopuld have given them the land after the war that they had worked for two hudred years, then they wouldn't have needed so many social services

The land wasn't the government's to give.

 

[BillyBob]

You just insulted white trash everywhere jillian, this "boy" is the island where you go to dump all your trash because there is too much trash in the landfill.

Good lord, that's retarded. Now you're just embarrassing yourself.

 

[random3434]

Good lord, that's retarded. Now you're just embarrassing yourself.

I am so ashamed.


Someone like you,,,,of all the people in the world, thinks I'm retarded.


I give you about another hour on here.

 

[BrianH]

That's just a fact.

Let's have some fun! Wanna look stupid? Try to say slavery wasn't the reason for the war.

Hmm..."The South Started the Civil War Over Slavery"

Let's disect this shall we.

WRONG.

Granted, it is a fact that slavery "happened" to be the issue in which the confrontation arose. But, the issue was soley or even remotely about slavery. It could have been any other thing. Had the feds decided to take everyone's guns away, it could have been that. For the South, it was about STATE'S RIGHTS.

Let's first keep in mind that slavery was LEGAL in the North until 1865. That means both sides, North & South fought the entire Civil War over something that was LEGAL? Hard to believe.

The Civil War was fought over succession of Southern states and the attempt of the North to preserve the Union. We had a rather large and long thread about this a while back..

The fact is, this will never be settled. The South believes it had the right to succeed. Based on the 10th Amendment. Considering the 10th gives states the right to excercise powers not delegated to the U.S. gov. and not prohibited to the states, the South viewed the succession as legal. The North, however, did not, and believed it was their duty to preserve the Union.

The Civil War was fought over States Rights....apparently, state's rights that the Fed didn't believed the state had. It was not fought over slavery. IT makes one wonder, that if the South had not suceeded, would there have ever been a war?

 

[Charles_Main]

Hmm..."The South Started the Civil War Over Slavery"

Let's disect this shall we.

WRONG.

Granted, it is a fact that slavery "happened" to be the issue in which the confrontation arose. But, the issue was soley or even remotely about slavery. It could have been any other thing. Had the feds decided to take everyone's guns away, it could have been that. For the South, it was about STATE'S RIGHTS.

Let's first keep in mind that slavery was LEGAL in the North until 1865. That means both sides, North & South fought the entire Civil War over something that was LEGAL? Hard to believe.

The Civil War was fought over succession of Southern states and the attempt of the North to preserve the Union. We had a rather large and long thread about this a while back..

The fact is, this will never be settled. The South believes it had the right to succeed. Based on the 10th Amendment. Considering the 10th gives states the right to excercise powers not delegated to the U.S. gov. and not prohibited to the states, the South viewed the succession as legal. The North, however, did not, and believed it was their duty to preserve the Union.

The Civil War was fought over States Rights....apparently, state's rights that the Fed didn't believed the state had. It was not fought over slavery. IT makes one wonder, that if the South had not suceeded, would there have ever been a war?

I would question the Idea that slavery was legal in the North until 1865, many northern states had state laws outlawing slavery well before 1865.

The real hot button issue was actually about expansion of slavery into the new territories.

 

[stivex]

The Civil War was not about or because of slavery. The issue of slavery was simply the last straw that broke the camel's back so to speak. The succession of the South was bouund to come about some time. Abraham Lincoln just decided to use the war as a means to set the slaves free. Yet, it took him years to decide to finally do it.

To say the war was simply about slavery is naive. It also leads one to believe that the Northern people were tolerant of blacks while the Sountern folk were racist asshats. The truth is most whites were racist at the time. That includes the North. They just didn't believe in slavery, and the North (being far more industrial) didn't need need slavery for its economy like the South did.

 

[Charles_Main]

The Civil War was not about or because of slavery. The issue of slavery was simply the last straw that broke the camel's back so to speak. The succession of the South was bouund to come about some time. Abraham Lincoln just decided to use the war as a means to set the slaves free. Yet, it took him years to decide to finally do it.

I agree slavery was only the botton issue not the sole cause.

However Everything I have read about Lincoln leads me to believe when he freed the slaves he was doing more because he thought it would help in the prosecution of the war, and not because he necessarily wanted to free the slaves.

He actually announced it well before he put it into effect, He gave the southern states an ultimatum. Return to the union or I will free the slaves. Obviously they said FU and fought on. I have also read a lot about how Jefferson Davis actually toyed with the Idea of Offering freedom to slaves who would fight for the south.

Another interesting thing about the war, is many of the issues that the south did not like about Lincoln and the north, ended up being implemented by Davis. For instance Davis also suspended habeas corpus as Lincoln did. In addition the Confederacy actually was set up with even more central control than the US government had. For instance the Government of the south controlled the Cotton trade, and regulated the economy strongly.

To say the war was simply about slavery is naive. It also leads one to believe that the Northern people were tolerant of blacks while the Sountern folk were racist asshats. The truth is most whites were racist at the time. That includes the North. They just didn't believe in slavery, and the North (being far more industrial) didn't need need slavery for its economy like the South did.

Very true, even most Abolitionist while wanting to end slavery were not so keen when it came to the issue of equality among the races. In addition I would point out that only 1 in 5 southerners were slave owners. Most people in the south who fought did so to defend their states, and their land, from what they saw as northern aggression.

Clearly the Civil war is not as simple as a war about slavery. It was indeed about states, rights, and IMO forever answered the question about if states can leave the union or not.

Lincoln often argued that if he allowed the south to leave the union where would it stop. He said soon other states would leave that union, and than counties and cities would start leaving states. He felt it would end in Anarchy. Lincolns principle reason for prosecuting the war was as he said, to prove that the majority does rule in a democracy and that a minority can not just break the union when ever they are not happy with the way things are. He often spoke of how the US was the only real example of democracy at the time, and he felt allowing the union to be broke would send the message that democracy was a failure.

IMO while Lincoln trampled some rights, and bent the constitution to fight the war, I am glad he did it. Because if he had not, we would not be what we are today. Who knows where it would have lead, and where the dividing would have stopped.

 

[JimH52]

Good lord, that's retarded. Now you're just embarrassing yourself.

I am today writing you off as a mutant. PLEASE STAY OUT OF THE SUN AND DO NOT PROCREATE...sorry, I mean do the dirty, in white trash talk.

 

[Gunny]

That's just a fact.

Let's have some fun! Wanna look stupid? Try to say slavery wasn't the reason for the war.

Want to look even stupider? Say it was THE reason for the US Civil War.

Except for the small minority of abolishonists. Northerners didn't give a rat's ass about blacks nor slavery. Attacking slavery was a means to attack Southern powerbrokers at their base. Take away slaves and you take away the means of Southern money, influence and political power.

The Civil War was fought for control of the US Government by two regional power factions in order to maintain and/or introduce legislation that favored their different means of making money, industry vs agriculture.

Different on the surface. The only difference between Southern slavery and Northern sweatshops was at least the South was just honest about it and called it what it was. The South enslaved blacks while the North took Europena immigrants, made them beholden to the company store with a debt they had no hope of repaying and either th ewhole family attempted to work it off 16 hours a day for the company or they got tossed in debtor's prison.

Nice, that.

So you can take your attempt to attribute some lofty goal to typical US imperialistic aggression and stick it. Slavery was just a means to an end for both sides. A base of wealth and power for the South, and a means to destroy that base of wealth and power for the North.

 

[Gunny]

The Civil War was not about or because of slavery. The issue of slavery was simply the last straw that broke the camel's back so to speak. The succession of the South was bouund to come about some time. Abraham Lincoln just decided to use the war as a means to set the slaves free. Yet, it took him years to decide to finally do it.

There was also no lofty goal in freeing Southern slaves. It was a practical strategy of war. If by freeing slaves in the South it would foment unrest or rebellion among slaves, it would pull troops off the front lines to go home and provide security.

To say the war was simply about slavery is naive. It also leads one to believe that the Northern people were tolerant of blacks while the Sountern folk were racist asshats. The truth is most whites were racist at the time. That includes the North. They just didn't believe in slavery, and the North (being far more industrial) didn't need need slavery for its economy like the South did

See my previous post. The North just had a different name for what amounted to the same thing.

 

[Gunny]

I am today writing you off as a mutant. PLEASE STAY OUT OF THE SUN AND DO NOT PROCREATE...sorry, I mean do the dirty, in white trash talk.

He can't hear you.

 

[random3434]

He can't hear you.

 

[editec]

There are so many mistake in history here, or outright lies, that one hardly know where to begin.

Let's start at the beginning.

The North did not START the war, the South did, remember?

Can we agree on that simple fact?

I'll wait for your responses.

 

[Gunny]

There are so many mistake in history here, or outright lies, that one hardly know where to begin.

Let's start at the beginning.

The North did not START the war, the South did, remember?

Can we agree on that simple fact?

I'll wait for your responses.

Depends on your definition of "start." Did the South fire the first shot? Yes. To eject US military forces from South Carolina. Was the South the aggressor that declared war? No.

Did the North bring about events in government deemed unacceptable by the Southern states that precipitated their secession? Yes.

The South believed that the "experiment" called the United States no longer suited its best interest nor need, and believed they had every right to leave as freely as they entered and NO legislation at the time precluded such.

On the premise that the South did NOT have that right, the US militarily invaded the states declared "in rebellion."

There are lies here alright. I agree with that. What I'm sure we don't agree on is who is doing the lying.